While I loved the flavor the Thaumaturge and have issues with the mechanics of its current implementation (locked to Charisma as opposed to flexing between the various mental stats really doesn't feel appropriate given its current abilities and flavor), on a second read-through, something feels deeply off about the Thaumaturge.
Its base abilities don't seem to interact with any existing systems and many of its class feats are so specific that it feels "empty" in a way, that when combined with its already narrow concept and restrictive mechanics (penalized for not using 1-handed weapons), make it seem fundamentally flawed.
Given that the core of the class's customization, the implement system, is exclusive to the class and does not interact with any other systems, the Thaumaturge seems highly parasitic.
Compare it to the Alchemist. Alchemical items are its specialty, and it uses them quite well. However, Alchemical Items are available to everyone, and its status in the system guarantees future support. The same applies to spellcasters and traditions. Traditions can be accessed in many ways and their prevalence in the system encourages continued support.
Meanwhile, the Thaumaturge, at its core, is tied to implements that serve no purpose outside of the class. It will only receive updates if it gets dedicated support in the future, and does not cleanly interact with any systems that may grow later on. If it had stronger ties to existing mechanics, such as rituals, magic items, focus spells, etc. it wouldn't feel quite as egregious. Even its use of Recall Knowledge is entirely divorced from how it works in the system.
This combined with the specificity of many of the class feats (save for the talisman, scroll, and ritual feats which are fantastic ways to integrate it with the core system) as well as the other restrictions created by the class, make me strongly dislike the current mechanical skeleton of the class.
I'm not sure I really understand the complaint. Nearly ever class has unique features that don't change much.
Like, why is "thaumaturges won't get new implements unless they specifically add more" any different than saying the same thing about, say, barbarian instincts or druidic orders.
I don't think a class needs an extrinsic mechanic to be good, and I don't think Thaumaturge is fundamentally flawed. Also not sure what "parasitic" mechanics are.
That said, it would be cool to see them get Talisman Esoterica as a feature at level 1 rather than a feat, then expand the other esoterica feats to wands and staves. Talismans are overall fairly weak, but being able to prepare a jade cat when you know you'll be going through a treacherous pass or go "Gah! Glad I brought the last Piton of Sennerjaibal [savior's spike], or I'd have fallen right into that pit trap!"
I wouldn't want anything else baseline or the feats, but I think preparing free talismans is very cool, and very much up the Thaumaturge's alley.
I don't think a class needs an extrinsic mechanic to be good, and I don't think Thaumaturge is fundamentally flawed. Also not sure what "parasitic" mechanics are.
That said, it would be cool to see them get Talisman Esoterica as a feature at level 1 rather than a feat, then expand the other esoterica feats to wands and staves. Talismans are overall fairly weak, but being able to prepare a jade cat when you know you'll be going through a treacherous pass or go "Gah! Glad I brought the last Piton of Sennerjaibal [savior's spike], or I'd have fallen right into that pit trap!"
I wouldn't want anything else baseline or the feats, but I think preparing free talismans is very cool, and very much up the Thaumaturge's alley.
Parasitic mechanics are mechanics that both don't interact well with anything and will be hard to make interact with things in the future. Examples in other games are Energy in Magic: The Gathering or Archwings in Warframe.
This is most prevalent when there are multiple mechanics that do very similar things, but have varying degrees of support that is not necessarily interchangeable. This was absolutely an issue in 1e.
One of the best examples of this in the Thaumaturge is that the Pact Class Feats are very similar in function to the Contract magic items, but support for either in the future will not affect the other one. This could be solved by making Contracts that have the effect of those Pacts, and rather than having the Pacts as feats, the Thaumaturge has feats that change how they interact with Contracts (more ways to weasel out, easier access, etc.).
This allows the creation of future support that helps both Contracts as a design space *and* the Thaumaturge. The current implementations are already kinda funky, since the Thaumaturge gets easy access to these unique Pacts, but doesn't get easy access to the thematically near-identical Contracts.
As an aside, the talisman and scroll stuff are both very fun and excellent examples of how to deliver the flavor while being very interactive with the current system, though I do think the Talisman feats do not need to be split across three separate feats that do nothing but give more Talismans per day.
Why is it a bad thing that this class has unique stuff? No other class has an eidolon, should we scrap Summoner?
It's not uniqueness == bad
It's that future interactivity is going to be made very awkward when all the various different parts of the class are separate from the system, which is exacerbated by the very specific nature of various feats and features it receives. Compare it to 1e which received a ton of orphaned mechanics or ideas or subsystems which just didn't mesh together because Article A only works with System B, despite there also existing System C, which does what System B does but very slightly differently.
That and some of the stuff the Thaumaturge does is already done with other parts of the system it could connect to to ensure that both are supported in the future. Contract items and the Pact feats are both very similar mechanically and thematically, so why not integrate the latter into the former and instead give the Thaumaturge more ways to interact with Contracts?
There's lots of magic items that can and do perform functions similar to that of the current implements as well for more interactivity in the future. Why lock them only to the healing chalice when drinking implements that can apply other effects already exist? Why give them this one specific wand of generic blasting instead of allowing them to create/use magic wands of varying abilities, and then let them blast on top?
They can be unique *and* have strong interaction with existing parts of the system, especially those that are underutilized (like Talismans and Contracts)
After all, while the Summoner does have their unique Eidolon, they still have the same spell traditions as everyone else and all the various systems that come with it.
Implements are no different from a Barbarian's instincts. They only get new instincts or new feats building on them in stuff specifically written for the class.
Implements are no different from a Barbarian's instincts. They only get new instincts or new feats building on them in stuff specifically written for the class.
I don't see this as a problem.
The difference is implements have an entire system with a similar thematics that they could connect with for a huge increase in versatility.
Imagine if you could have your Wand Implement not only serve it's current function, but also gain a thematic new spell that you decide based on your wand's personal history. Or your chalice could emulate the effect of a potion. Or your weapon could gain a property rune.
These sorts of customization elements would feel especially nice and allow for future content to indirectly boost the class just like new alchemical items and new spells boost the alchemist and spellcasters indirectly.
Plus, it's thematically awkward for a conductor's baton, a gnarled branch from a withered dryad, and an author's stylus to all do the same exact thing just because they're all "Wand Implements". Where are the mechanics to back up those flavors? Magic item mechanics (could be baked in, class feats, or something else) are an excellent way to expand the myriad possibilities for when you want some more specific flavors.
Plus, there's already precedent for magic item support in the class with the feats to make Talismans and Scrolls and the feat to increase the amount of items you can invest in.
I mean, some of those might be neat, but that's not really changing how the options integrate so much as just fundamentally changing those mechanics. Maybe fundamentally changing them would be better, but that's another argument than the one you're making.
You mentioned Warframe's Archwings... the reason those were problematic is that it was an entirely section of the game that was essentially fully insulated and separate from everything else.
The thaumaturge's implements aren't that. They're just... a class feature and nearly every class has something like it.
Elements of the Thaumaturge class are also insulated from similar mechanics.
The implements are don't have any connection, optional or otherwise, to magic items. There's no crossover between them despite both being specific tools with specific supernatural powers that can tread very similar thematic ground.
The Pacts are another example. They are thematically and mechanically incredibly similar to Contracts, yet they do not connect in any way and frankly are so outright similar to Contracts that they shouldn't even be separate, but optionally connected like Implements.
Even Find Flaws is a little weird in that it's like Recall Knowledge but some of the factors that contribute to it (like high Intelligence or Wisdom) don't contribute to Find Flaws (though there are other issues with Find Flaws).
There's this excellent part of the system that the class could interact more with to feel more unique and grant more customization, but it feels inconsistent as to what it tries to connect.
The rules say you start with an implement that is mundane but there's no reason to suppose it has to start that way. They'll probably add an ability to "remake" your implements if you lose them. Your wand implement could also be a regular wand
The rules say you start with an implement that is mundane but there's no reason to suppose it has to start that way. They'll probably add an ability to "remake" your implements if you lose them. Your wand implement could also be a regular wand
Adding class feats and other detailed customization stuff would be rather nice, especially for implements without strict magic item analogues.
Plus, it feels more thematic to have the class let you light your sword on fire "because it was pulled from the heart of a fire giant" than to just buy the appropriate rune from Magic Walmart.
There will be nine implements in the final book, is the plan. AFAIK. I think that's plenty for what is effectively their subclass. Implements are not like spells, or alchemical items which it's extra important to have variety for. IMO.
@Golirkcanfly: I absolutely understand what you are saying with regard to the problems in creating needlessly bespoke mechanics that aren’t integrating with the extant system and that limit future support to specific additions instead of more wider additions that serve multiple applications. If your points resonate with the developers then so much the better. They may disagree, or partly agree or agree completely.
I think you make an excellent point, just not sure if it is actually true!.
It is basically the same argument as made by Golurkcanfly. I can see what they are saying honestly. Thaumaturge is very insulated existing mechanics, even those that are similar to their schtick. The only abilities they get that are improved by future releases are feat based ones, not intrinsic Class Abilities.
Stuff like Scroll or Talisman Esoterica get better as new spells or talismans are released, but those aren't "core" mechanics of Thaumaturge, they are optional. I suppose an argument could be made that Weapon Implement options improve with each new weapon added.
I'll have to think on this a bit to decide if it's really as much of a problem as it can be in other mediums.
I think if we changed the way these implements were described in the fiction from the items they currently are to mindsets in which you channel a different Harrow suit/member of the travelling caravan/etc, no-one would be talking about them as parasitic mechanics. Their visual similarity, in-universe, to magic items shouldn't be an aspect of whether their design is too insulated from other design elements - it's truly no different than a Barbarian instinct, a Rogue racket, or a Sorcerer bloodline. There may be ways to have interesting tie-ins to magic items - your Wand implement interacting with magic wands via a feat, for example - but I think it's a real stretch to call it a fundamental issue of the class.
You seem to be making a mountain out of a mole hill and a white whale out of Pacts/Contracts. Contracts are rarity: rare while Pacts are rarity: uncommon; Contracts have clearly defined benefits, penalties, compulsions, and termination methods (with the exeption of the Thrune, which I know nothing about). Pacts are much less clearly defined and vague, left more to GM interpretation, and have more basic and easy to follow compulsions like "Be nice to house guests. Preform last rites properly." and the like. Contracts are also not in any "mainline" material, they're either AP or Legends entries, and unless you live on AoN, have probably never heard of them.
And I do like the idea of making the chalice give a free potion once a day or free runes of Nth level or lower on the weapon, those'll probably be feats offered in the final book. Remember, this is a rough draft, there's gonna be 4 more implements in the final book, and probably way more feats/features that play off of what you picked.
One point though: basically every martial in the game is guilty of what
Golurkcanfly is talking about. They will only get new options if new subclasses or feats are published. Alchemists and all casters get new options when new spells and alchemical poisons are released, and to a lesser extent when new alchemical items in general (due to how most research fields are written).
Since Thaumaturgists are martials, that they fall into the same boat is not surprising, though disappointing. I would not have minded class abilities that focused on the non-alchemical and non-gadget consumables, possibly even to the point of making talisman and scroll options implement lines instead. Well, perhaps not talismans, but a theoretical book implement might lead naturally to fulu and scroll dabbling.
The reverse could be done though. Perhaps we can get a "potion" and "contract" dabbler, and the pact feats indeed converted to items instead.
I don't know; I have the shape of an idea that I never full made into a class archetype for the alchemist, but having the ability to opt into consumable items of all sorts sounds interesting.
One point though: basically every martial in the game is guilty of what
Golurkcanfly is talking about. They will only get new options if new subclasses or feats are published. Alchemists and all casters get new options when new spells and alchemical poisons are released, and to a lesser extent when new alchemical items in general (due to how most research fields are written).
Since Thaumaturgists are martials, that they fall into the same boat is not surprising, though disappointing. I would not have minded class abilities that focused on the non-alchemical and non-gadget consumables, possibly even to the point of making talisman and scroll options implement lines instead. Well, perhaps not talismans, but a theoretical book implement might lead naturally to fulu and scroll dabbling.
The reverse could be done though. Perhaps we can get a "potion" and "contract" dabbler, and the pact feats indeed converted to items instead.
I don't know; I have the shape of an idea that I never full made into a class archetype for the alchemist, but having the ability to opt into consumable items of all sorts sounds interesting.
Part of the issue is that there are multiple elements resembling other parts of the system as well as the Thaumaturge already having some rather harsh restrictions that work against its flavor.
Opening up implements to have some interactivity with magic items not only gives the Thaumaturge more options to expand their flavor, but also helps the class *feel* like it's pulling from a bag of random tricks and trinkets. Other subclasses in other martials also have some form of customization with feats and whatnot.
As-is, the incredibly narrow scope of each Implement, combined with how Find Flaws only simulates the end result of the bag of trinkets, and what's in the bag *doesn't actually matter*, make the issue feel particularly rough. Allowing implements and the Thaumaturge to do more in general by interacting more with the systems already in place allow for the variety the class is trying to sell in its fantasy.
Just to be clear, is your complaint that the items used for Esoteric Antithesis/find flaws are completely unspecific? Because if so, I am in strong disagreement with you. I think that’s one of the strengths of the class mechanic, that you are able to pull literally anything out of your bag and it works, leaving the exact details up to the player.
And if that does not satisfy you, there is feat support to make your character able to pull items of actual value out of your bag.
Just to be clear, is your complaint that the items used for Esoteric Antithesis/find flaws are completely unspecific? Because if so, I am in strong disagreement with you. I think that’s one of the strengths of the class mechanic, that you are able to pull literally anything out of your bag and it works, leaving the exact details up to the player.
And if that does not satisfy you, there is feat support to make your character able to pull items of actual value out of your bag.
.
It's less that they are specific and more that there's no customization to tailor the specificity to better fit changes in flavor.
Like, regardless of the nature of a given implement, all implements of the same category do the exact same thing. There is nothing that lets you tailor your sword pulled from the heart of a fire giant to be any different from a sword found at the bottom of a pond in the First World.
The current abilities are cool, but they are simply inflexible with slightly different flavor. It doesn't make sense for a tankard full of ale to get stronger when you bleed in the same way that a chalice full of healing blood does. Meanwhile, a Dragon Instinct Barbarian has different mechanics for revering/hunting dragons, different types of dragons, and multiple feats for further customization in a way that I do not believe choosing multiple implements makes up for (compare it to how Druids can tailor their own Oath and poach from other Oaths).
A layer of customization (especially with feats which the class lacks) would help this greatly, and grabbing effects from magic items is an easy way to do that without writing a ton of new material.
So your issue is not directly related to Find Flaws Esoteric Antithesis, but the invariable nature of the implements? I ask because you mention that mechanic directly here:
Golurkcanfly wrote:
As-is, the incredibly narrow scope of each Implement, combined with how Find Flaws only simulates the end result of the bag of trinkets, and what's in the bag *doesn't actually matter*, make the issue feel particularly rough.
I can see if you feel the mostly flavor nature of find flaw items contributing to the feeling you have with implements, but I wanted to be clear on exactly what you meant.
So your issue is not directly related to Find Flaws Esoteric Antithesis, but the invariable nature of the implements? I ask because you mention that mechanic directly here:
Golurkcanfly wrote:
As-is, the incredibly narrow scope of each Implement, combined with how Find Flaws only simulates the end result of the bag of trinkets, and what's in the bag *doesn't actually matter*, make the issue feel particularly rough.
I can see if you feel the mostly flavor nature of find flaw items contributing to the feeling you have with implements, but I wanted to be clear on exactly what you meant.
It's two different issues that contribute to the same sort of unease in the current implementation of the class.
The Find Flaws feature is about using a grab bag of junk to find the right tool for the job, but since it's literally impossible to represent every possible tool, the rummaging is solely flavor to produce the same effect regardless of what is retrieved. Therefore, I'd expect the other core mechanic of the class to supplement the flavor.
However, on top of the inflexibility and lack of customization of Implements, their entire concept is the opposite of the "grab bag" since instead of having a variety of tools for every situation, you're married to 1-3.
This leads to both individual elements of the class being unsatisfying on their own as well as how they interact being discordant in flavor.
The implements aren't really the grab bag thing, though. They're just more like your larger occult focus - like your signature occult item.
Everything else is the grab bag - the esoterica you carry around or have attached to yourself.
It's pretty common for characters of this theme (signature hunting items and then often having random extra stuff used to hunt specific things).
Yet, sadly, those "signature items" are completely lacking in customization.
It feels bizarre for every Thaumaturge that uses a Chalice to have the same exact function of regardless of the form of the Chalice (actual chalice, tankard, coffee mug, flask of water, etc) when there's a wonderful system in place for customizing your class: Class Feats. For whatever reason, there just aren't feats that let you customize your implements, and while I understand some might be a little tricky (there aren't too many different things you could use a Lantern for), they could certainly expand upon them anyways.
Wand Implements could be customized to allow you to cast spells through them if you wanted with a class feat
Weapon Implements could receive additional property runes like Blade Ally if you wanted with a class feat
Chalice Implements could fill themselves with certain potions if you wanted with a class feat
Lantern Implements could replicate spells with the Light trait if you wanted with a class feat
Amulet Implements could allow you to ward against specific creature or effect types if you wanted with a class feat
Yet, sadly, those "signature items" are completely lacking in customization.
It feels bizarre for every Thaumaturge that uses a Chalice to have the same exact function of regardless of the form of the Chalice (actual chalice, tankard, coffee mug, flask of water, etc) when there's a wonderful system in place for customizing your class: Class Feats. For whatever reason, there just aren't feats that let you customize your implements, and while I understand some might be a little tricky (there aren't too many different things you could use a Lantern for), they could certainly expand upon them anyways.
But most classes with that many options, namely the wizard, cleric, witch, and sorcerer classes, all also offer little to no customization for their varied class option. How many feats build directly on specific wizard schools or domains, for example? What options they do have are mostly along the lines of “you get the next level of power for your chosen option.” Which the thaumaturge also gets in the form of Intense Implement.
And you can certainly, and have in fact, make the argument that those classes get spells instead, and that is their main class ability instead of their bloodline, patron/familiar, domain, or school, but it is also arguable that the Thaumaturge’s main thing is Find Flaws. Which does have a number of feats that build on it.
For my money, I would prefer they leave the implements more or less as they are, but offer more variation in the Find Flaw ability. I would also prefer the ability names reversed to aid that, but I can’t have everything.
Edit: This isn’t to take a dump on your idea, as I actually would enjoy something along the lines of what you suggest. I’m just not sure it’s ultimately realistic with how they’ve designed classes so far.
Yet, sadly, those "signature items" are completely lacking in customization.
It feels bizarre for every Thaumaturge that uses a Chalice to have the same exact function of regardless of the form of the Chalice (actual chalice, tankard, coffee mug, flask of water, etc) when there's a wonderful system in place for customizing your class: Class Feats. For whatever reason, there just aren't feats that let you customize your implements, and while I understand some might be a little tricky (there aren't too many different things you could use a Lantern for), they could certainly expand upon them anyways.
But most classes with that many options, namely the wizard, cleric, witch, and sorcerer classes, all also offer little to no customization for their varied class option. How many feats build directly on specific wizard schools or domains, for example? What options they do have are mostly along the lines of “you get the next level of power for your chosen option.” Which the thaumaturge also gets in the form of Intense Implement.
And you can certainly, and have in fact, make the argument that those classes get spells instead, and that is their main class ability instead of their bloodline, patron/familiar, domain, or school, but it is also arguable that the Thaumaturge’s main thing is Find Flaws. Which does have a number of feats that build on it.
For my money, I would prefer they leave the implements more or less as they are, but offer more variation in the Find Flaw ability. I would also prefer the ability names reversed to aid that, but I can’t have everything.
Edit: This isn’t to take a dump on your idea, as I actually would enjoy something along the lines of what you suggest. I’m just not sure it’s ultimately realistic with how they’ve designed classes so far.
I think the difference is that the Wizard's school changes how they interact with their other main mechanic which has a high degree of customization, while Implements and Find Flaws are entirely separate from each other.
That they still get feats to unlock new powers rather than just upgrading the existing powers (which scale by being Focus Spells anyways).
I think one feat per Implement that lets you choose from a list of benefits would be enough, and those lists may be generated without much extra text by referencing existing system mechanics, such as "You may choose one property rune with a level equal to or lower than yours to add to your weapon, and may change this property rune..." or "Through the power of belief, you use your wand for more than energy blasts. Choose a spell of X level or lower, up to Y times per day, when you activate your wand, you may instead cast that spell."
The thaumaturge already has some feats that are very open-ended like this, such as the scroll creation feats, but they sadly don't have any that reference their implements.
I think the discussion has brought up some salient points, so I’m happy with the original post for that. And as this is a playtest document, there is still scope for Implement-conversant Class Feats to be added in, other classes perhaps not getting the same treatment notwithstanding.
I think the discussion has brought up some salient points, so I’m happy with the original post for that. And as this is a playtest document, there is still scope for Implement-conversant Class Feats to be added in, other classes perhaps not getting the same treatment notwithstanding.
Yeah, it's certainly helped me gather and organize my initial thoughts into more specific pieces of feedback. I think the thread is at a good point to close and talk about more specific points. And I've already seen some other ones like that thread about Pacts as feats feeling really weird when Contracts exist.
I think you're trying to turn Implements into something they aren't the way people tried to do the same thing with Eidolons.
They don't need more customization. You can flavor them however you want, but the feature value and variation they add comes from the 9 different ones you can choose from as you add more to your character.
The fact you can pick 3 eventually and mix and match them as you see fit is already more variation than any other class gets in forming their core style.
Remember that implements are the equivalent of rackets, instincts, and things. You aren't going to see any more variety than besides what you pick, just like summoners pick their buddy and that's it.
Now there will likely be more feats that interact with them the way you can pick up feats that change debilitating strike on a rogue based on your racket, or barbarians get better animal powers, but they likely aren't in this playtest because that wasn't something Paizo wants to test.
I think you're trying to turn Implements into something they aren't the way people tried to do the same thing with Eidolons.
They don't need more customization. You can flavor them however you want, but the feature value and variation they add comes from the 9 different ones you can choose from as you add more to your character.
The fact you can pick 3 eventually and mix and match them as you see fit is already more variation than any other class gets in forming their core style.
Remember that implements are the equivalent of rackets, instincts, and things. You aren't going to see any more variety than besides what you pick, just like summoners pick their buddy and that's it.
Now there will likely be more feats that interact with them the way you can pick up feats that change debilitating strike on a rogue based on your racket, or barbarians get better animal powers, but they likely aren't in this playtest because that wasn't something Paizo wants to test.
Except Summoners don't just pick their buddy and that's it.
Each Eidolon type has two different statlines, many have a built in choice (like the dragon breath weapon), and then you have a myriad of Evolution feats to customize your Eidolon with.
Other subclasses in other classes also have additional levels of customization from feats.
One huge difference with implements is that order matters. A thaumaturge going Chalice>Lantern>Weapon is going to play very differently from one who went Weapon>Lantern>Chalice. An eidolon is a choice at level 1 only.
Each Eidolon type has two different statlines, many have a built in choice (like the dragon breath weapon), and then you have a myriad of Evolution feats to customize your Eidolon with.
Other subclasses in other classes also have additional levels of customization from feats.
Only for about half the classes. A slight majority have at most 2 feats that are tied to a specific subclass, including the summoner, though I think it will flip the other way next month.
I really think you're intended to get that sense of customization by which set of implements you pick for your character, with each group of three offering a different character "story", with further customization in how deeply you advance with your implement. Yes, every level 2 chalice user gets the same ability, but not every chalice user gets level 2; and maybe you paired it with a lantern while another prefers a weapon.
All that said, one thing that might sway things in your favor is that you do get to pick 3 implements out of the nine. Normally that subclass choice locks you out of all others; that isn't the case with this class. They're more like order explorer druids without needing to spend the additional feat, and so have access to the feats of multiple implements.
Each Eidolon type has two different statlines, many have a built in choice (like the dragon breath weapon), and then you have a myriad of Evolution feats to customize your Eidolon with.
Other subclasses in other classes also have additional levels of customization from feats.
Only for about half the classes. A slight majority have at most 2 feats that are tied to a specific subclass, including the summoner, though I think it will flip the other way next month.
I really think you're intended to get that sense of customization by which set of implements you pick for your character, with each group of three offering a different character "story", with further customization in how deeply you advance with your implement. Yes, every level 2 chalice user gets the same ability, but not every chalice user gets level 2; and maybe you paired it with a lantern while another prefers a weapon.
All that said, one thing that might sway things in your favor is that you do get to pick 3 implements out of the nine. Normally that subclass choice locks you out of all others; that isn't the case with this class. They're more like order explorer druids without needing to spend the additional feat, and so have access to the feats of multiple implements.
We just need to have the feats for the implements then, like I've been saying.
One open-ended customization feat for each implement would go a long way to supporting the other core feature of the class. Open-ended being the key part, since it's possible to provide a huge amount of variety for the least work by referencing existing material (weapon runes for weapons, spells for wands, potions for chalices, light effects for lanterns, no idea what to do for amulets but I'm sure Mark Seifter could figure something cool out, etc.).
Ideally, Thaumaturges that take the same implements in the same order should have enough customization for you to not get the same combination more than once. The method described above is a very fast way to do that that also has precedent within the system already.
If they went with consumables of some sort (also, amulets could be armor runes), I would prefer that to just be a part of the implement's baseline power, not added in as a feat. 9 feats just seems like a lot when a class typically is released with 50 to 60 feats, and often less (the Magus has 45, for example).
But honestly I think that is supposed to be a part of the Handy/Implausible Esoterica feats. Would be nice if they were free or heavily discounted though.
If they went with consumables of some sort (also, amulets could be armor runes), I would prefer that to just be a part of the implement's baseline power, not added in as a feat. 9 feats just seems like a lot when a class typically is released with 50 to 60 feats, and often less (the Magus has 45, for example).
But honestly I think that is supposed to be a part of the Handy/Implausible Esoterica feats. Would be nice if they were free or heavily discounted though.
Being part of the baseline is actually my preference, to be honest. Only reason I'm suggesting feats is that there's been several people I've spoken to who are completely against it being a core feature.
I think I'm ultimately coming down against it as well. Your posts have more strongly convinced me that what you desire from implements is not a good design direction for the class, and the way they have it is reasonable for what is ultimately not the primary class feature. Given the number of classes that don't have feats that build on their subclass, I don't think it is too much of a deal breaker that this class joins them, given how much customization the implement class feature as a whole already offers.
For instance, this:
Golurkcanfly wrote:
Ideally, Thaumaturges that take the same implements in the same order should have enough customization for you to not get the same combination more than once.
is already up to 5 different characters with the class as written. Intense Implement would add another 5 combinations.
I realize that you dislike that the higher level abilities are all improvements to the baseline, which makes them all feel the same to you, but I would support more variation between the three levels before adding on additional feats or consumables.
